Author Topic: Magnetic energy pump OU motor (Read 61574 times)

wizkycho · « **on:** August 05, 2006, 03:30:43 PM »

I propose this simple and working design to be made quickly

based on truly magnificent experiment

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/mep1.htm

Pic explanation:
only one wound coil (orange) is shown.(there are 3) and are pulsed in same time
(light orange) is just some wood or plastic mechanical spacer distancer that stops steel plates to bend to rotor.(only one shown)
(light blue) none magnetic material.
(dark gray blue) is magnetic steel material.
magnets are red-blue.

How it works:
1. if wound coil is not energized magnets close their fields through core of coil.
2. when coil is energized magnets badly want's to close their fields through rotor
and strongly attracts rotor steel.
3. when steel at rotor is completely attracted coil is switched of and inertia leads rotor
to next position suitable for energizing coil.(2.)

some simple electronics should be built to switch coil on and off.
For probe only ONE attractor can be made (no need for three)

If NdFeB magnets are used even twenty times (20) larger is mechanical output than small input electrical energy.

Igor Knitel

gyulasun · « **Reply #1 on:** August 07, 2006, 11:19:10 AM »

Hi Igor,

I am pleased you returned to this idea and showed this interesting setup.

You mentioned small electrical input energy need: however I do think that considering only the one coil case the electromagnet must receive an input energy to create a flux at least comparable or equal to any one permanent magnet's flux, right? But even so, your setup still seems to be overunity. Has anyone tested it?

I remember a setup on this Forum a year ago, based on similar principle but shown with a different layout:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,309.0.html and I think this also "seems" overunity but needs further design to utilize the output power.

Regards
Gyula

wizkycho · « **Reply #2 on:** August 07, 2006, 02:01:45 PM »

Quote from: gyulasun on August 07, 2006, 11:19:10 AM

Hi Igor,

I am pleased you returned to this idea and showed this interesting setup.

So am I, motionless setups are at least unstable and hard to replicate for beginner.
and working hy voltage wich makes electronics and measurements more complex
Easy replication is a must.

Quote from: gyulasun on August 07, 2006, 11:19:10 AM

You mentioned small electrical input energy need: however I do think that considering only the one coil case the electromagnet must receive an input energy to create a flux at least comparable or equal to any one permanent magnet's flux, right? But even so, your setup still seems to be overunity. Has anyone tested it?

What is certain is that input can be indeed small, much smaller than expected, probaly 1/5 th and smaller
of the strenght of one magnet but under one condition wich is not hard too meet. The rotor steel when switching coil on
must be very close or just started to overlap with stator plates. In this case magnet flux emidiatellly has way to close through rotor so input doesn't have to be that much forced.

Quote from: gyulasun on August 07, 2006, 11:19:10 AM

I remember a setup on this Forum a year ago, based on similar principle but shown with a different layout:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,309.0.html and I think this also "seems" overunity but needs further design to utilize the output power.

Regards
Gyula

Yes, interesting topic and evolved into this. Advantage is simplicity (no mechanicall input nedded). And this thingy
can be stacked to meet any power wanted.
i'll post a picture of it stacked.

Igor Knitel

wizkycho · « **Reply #3 on:** August 07, 2006, 02:55:21 PM »

Hy Gula and all!

This is pic shows it stacked. rotor is in about position to energize coils on the right side.
I think this is simpler to build than Hildenbrand design (allthough it is very very good one)
In Hildebrand design there is need for small negative coil energization to stop magnets from attracting rotor, which is not the case
in this design. When coil is off magnets close on themselves completely.

I'm putting any other research aside till I build this one.

Best Regards
Igor Knitel

mark australia · « **Reply #4 on:** August 07, 2006, 05:40:32 PM »

This looks very good...will be very interesting to see your results
mark

gyulasun · « **Reply #5 on:** August 08, 2006, 02:04:12 PM »

Hi Tao,

Many thanks for your interesting findings. Now we have more info on this setup.

I tend to think that using permanent magnets in the rotor instead of iron would increase the attractive force: this can be one conclusion from your second part: "NOW, when there IS an iron/steel core and without any power applied to the coil, the rotor is NOT ATTRACTED to the steel/iron bars at all. AND, as more DC current is applied to the coil the attraction of the rotor to the steel/iron bars is INCREASED until a maximum attraction."

Regards
Gyula

wizkycho · « **Reply #6 on:** August 08, 2006, 03:04:52 PM »

Hi !

This gives me the best on/off ratio and highest on Teslas through rotor steel and is much simpler then previous.
So I'll go with this one hoping that CD motor can generate enough.
There is allways steel core in wound coil in my setup and flux is ment to be pumped out to rotor.

Igor

wizkycho · « **Reply #7 on:** August 09, 2006, 10:30:21 AM »

Thanks Tao !

it is much easier to proceed if knowing that simulations results are simmilar.
Were we all wen't wrong is the point when seeing possible mechanical OU unit we
emidiatelly jumped to motionless setups where things forces and counter reactions
comes much more complex.
There is plenty of energy in these mechanicall setups... even for space trevel

Currently I'm searching for someone with CNC machine who is not on vacation...

Best regards
Igor

wizkycho · « **Reply #8 on:** August 10, 2006, 04:24:08 PM »

Last minute change !

The whole setup must be made of many thin plates (preferably silicon iron, or some soft magnetics)
with isolation between plates (sort of transformer like assembly) to stop eddy currents
develop and there would be many induced if parts are made as solid. Many of setups fail
cause of edy current induced.

I have oredered parts

Igor

Kator01 · « **Reply #9 on:** August 11, 2006, 01:05:41 AM »

Hello Igor,

I am watching as this thread develops and I wonder about one thing :

What makes you believe that with no force ( no current in coil) and adding magentic flux via current in the coil - that you get the power of two magnets ?

Basic experiment of J.Naudin just demonstrated that with a starting fieldvalue of one magnet ( not zero !!! ) you will get an undefined increase of field by the upcoming bucking-coil-field.

This bears no possibily of OU.

In the measurements you start with zero because the magnet-field is thinned out within the iron-plates. Applying coil-field will only give additionally that part.

Kator

Kator01 · « **Reply #10 on:** August 11, 2006, 03:08:28 PM »

tao,

the amount of flux-density in the space between the two magnets, which has to be compensated, is that of two magnets ( not of one )

So energy-input in coil necessary to compensate space-flux also is in the order of two magnets. It`s so obvious.

Kator

wizkycho · « **Reply #11 on:** August 11, 2006, 04:34:51 PM »

Quote from: Kator01 on August 11, 2006, 03:08:28 PM

tao,

the amount of flux-density in the space between the two magnets, which has to be compensated, is that of two magnets ( not of one )

So energy-input in coil necessary to compensate space-flux also is in the order of two magnets. It`s so obvious.

Kator

hy Kator !

As You see I'm using only one magnet, and one coil.
In every setup for now using magnets and coils from mechanicall (Flinn, Hildenbrand...) to motinless setups (MEG)
has been many times proven practically that small magnetic input is capable of manipulating many times larger magnetic fields...
Simulations allso says the same.
It is really magnetic transistor.

igor

Kator01 · « **Reply #12 on:** August 11, 2006, 10:38:39 PM »

Igor,

somehow pic5,gif on page two did not show up when I was loggend in lately.
What is the dimension of the coil you are planning for ? Windings, gauge, inner resistance, Ampere-Turns, Voltage applied ?

Only if you use a iron-core within the coil you will have the magnetic flux closed and no attractive force at the end of metal-bar-stator.

I have strong doubts and I simply do not know how the permeabilty of the iron-bar behaves on the right side of the coil facing the rotor.

MEG-Devices are no good argument. Any attempt failed practically,especially the HOPE of Mr. Fauble. They always ended up with powered neon-lights where you are not able to exactly calculate exact feed-in-energy. I cornered Mr. Fauble in challenging him to give proove by using incadescant bulbs. He admitted that this does not work.

So what I am suggesting here is to invent a simple representative experimental setup for proove of the principle, before you invest too much time . Naudine did not proove it. Simulations do not give proove either.

I have an open mind. Go slow and think about the principles first.
I myself will think about a setup for proove of principle.

Good luck
Kator

Kator01 · « **Reply #13 on:** August 12, 2006, 12:14:45 AM »

Hello tao,

yes, yes, I already understand what you mean. My simple question is :

how much energy input in coil is necessary for what amount of flux-density appearing at the
rear end attracting the rotor. No simulation can give you an answer here. You have to test it.
It is a oversimplified view to talk here about the way of least resistance. It is all a matter of permeabilty and saturation. When you apply a current to the coil, the flux has to overcome the polarized Fe-Elements. I simply ask for the amount of energy necessary to do this.
There is another unknown component in such a system : If you you use a bucking current-puls you will get a supersonic soundwave coming up in the flux-path, circling and bouncing forth and back in the iron-core. No one ever thoguht about this, not even Naudine was taking this into consideration. This might be a very nasty thing affecting your body. So please be careful whe you do practical tests. It is difficult to shield.
This supersonic-wave is occuring here for sure and might be causing side-effects either helpful or the contrary, I do not know

For detailed Information of this priciple here is a website of the german Frauenhofer-Institute :

http://www.ndt.net/article/0398/huebsch/hueb.htm

Kator01

Kator01 · « **Reply #14 on:** August 12, 2006, 08:23:37 PM »

Hello tao,

yes I will.

I encourage everyone to read this link about supersonic sensor-systems,. It is not a theory
it is a fact based on convetional physics
It is written in english.
They are able to produce mechanical supersonic waves in the range of GigaHerz, by using bucking-fields which create these waves by Lorenz-Force.
No mechanical trigger - therefore almost no limit to frequency !

http://www.ndt.net/article/0398/huebsch/hueb.htm

Kator

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Magnetic energy pump OU motor (Read 61574 times)

wizkycho

Magnetic energy pump OU motor

gyulasun

Re: Magnetic energy pump OU motor

wizkycho

Re: Magnetic energy pump OU motor

wizkycho

Re: Magnetic energy pump OU motor

mark australia

Re: Magnetic energy pump OU motor

gyulasun

Re: Magnetic energy pump OU motor

wizkycho

Re: Magnetic energy pump OU motor

wizkycho

Re: Magnetic energy pump OU motor

wizkycho

Re: Magnetic energy pump OU motor

Kator01

Re: Magnetic energy pump OU motor

Kator01

Re: Magnetic energy pump OU motor

wizkycho

Re: Magnetic energy pump OU motor

Kator01

Re: Magnetic energy pump OU motor

Kator01

Re: Magnetic energy pump OU motor

Kator01

Re: Magnetic energy pump OU motor